[Serusers] :-((

Wed Mar 2 20:48:44 CET 2005

What is wrong here?

beeplove at projukee.com  -> behind NAT outside ser using Kphone
mahfuz at projuktee.com   -> behind another NAT outside ser using Windows 
Messenger

Could anybody show me where I am doing wrong?

SipClient: Sending: 14:39:54.899
--------------------------------
MESSAGE sip:mahfuz at projuktee.com SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.51.0.161;branch=z9hG4bK5FEAA78B;alias
CSeq: 7658 MESSAGE
To: <sip:mahfuz at projuktee.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=UTF-8
From: "Mohammad Khan" <sip:beeplove at projuktee.com>;tag=5208EA62
Call-ID: 1457236851 at 10.51.0.161
Content-Length: 9
User-Agent: kphone/4.1.0
Contact: "Mohammad Khan" <sip:beeplove at 10.51.0.161;transport=tcp>

helloooo

SipClient: Sending to 'sip.projuktee.com:5060' (TCP)
SipClient: Receiving message...

SipClient: Received: 14:40:05.024
---------------------------------
SIP/2.0 477 Unfortunately error on sending to next hop occurred (477/TM)
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 
10.51.0.161;branch=z9hG4bK5FEAA78B;alias;rport=38973;received=66.105.xxx.yyy
CSeq: 7658 MESSAGE
To: <sip:mahfuz at projuktee.com>;tag=76b43a3b01465a3cbddc081c4176c4c9-3a18
From: "Mohammad Khan" <sip:beeplove at projuktee.com>;tag=5208EA62
Call-ID: 1457236851 at 10.51.0.161
Server: Sip EXpress router (0.9.0 (i386/linux))
Content-Length: 0
Warning: 392 192.168.71.2:5060 "Noisy feedback tells:  pid=9204 
req_src_ip=66.105.xxx.yyy req_src_port=38973 
in_uri=sip:mahfuz at projuktee.com 
out_uri=sip:192.168.1.54:10745;transport=tcp via_cnt==1"

ser.cfg
       if (nat_uac_test("3")) {
                # Allow RR-ed requests, as these may indicate that
                # a NAT-enabled proxy takes care of it; unless it is
                # a REGISTER
                if (method == "REGISTER" || ! search("^Record-Route:")) {
                        xlog("L_DBG", "LOG: Someone trying to register 
from private IP, rewriting\n");
                        # This will work only for user agents that 
support symmetric
                        # communication. We tested quite many ofhem and 
majority is
                        # smart enough to be symmetric. In some phones 
it takes a configuration
                        # option. With Cisco 7960, it is called 
NAT_Enable=Yes, with kphone it is
                        # called "symmetric media" and "symmetric 
signalling".
                        fix_nated_contact(); # Rewrite contact with 
source IP of signalling
                        if (method == "INVITE" || method == 'NOTIFY') {
                                fix_nated_sdp("1"); # Add 
direction=active to SDP
                        };
                        force_rport(); # Add rport parameter to topmost Via
                        setflag(6);    # Mark as NATed
                };
        };

        # if the request is for other domain use UsrLoc
        # (in case, it does not work, use the following command
        # with proper names and addresses in it)
        if (uri=~"projuktee.com") {

                if (method=="REGISTER") {

                        if (!www_authorize("projuktee.com", "subscriber")) {
                                www_challenge("projuktee.com", "1");
                                break;
                        };

                        save("location");
                        break;
                };

                if (method=="PUBLISH") {
                        if (!t_newtran()) {
                                xlog("L_DBG", "newtran error\n");
                                sl_reply_error();
                        };
                        handle_publish("registrar");
                        break;
                };

                lookup("aliases");
                if (!uri=~"projuktee.com") {
                        append_hf("P-hint: outbound alias\r\n");
                        route(1);
                        break;
                };

                # native SIP destinations are handled using our USRLOC DB
                if (!lookup("location")) {
                        sl_send_reply("404", "Not Found");
                        break;
                };
        };
        append_hf("P-hint: usrloc applied\r\n");
        route(1);
}

route[1]
{

        # !! Nathelper
        #if (uri=~"[@:](192\.168\.|10\.|172\.(1[6-9]|2[0-9]|3[0-1])\.)" 
&& !search("^Route:")){
        #       sl_send_reply("479", "We don't forward to private IP > 
 >addresses");
        #       break;
        #};

        # if client or server know to be behind a NAT, enable relay
        if (isflagset(6)) {
                force_rtp_proxy();
        };

        ##################
        # NAT processing of replies; apply to all transactions (for example,
        # re-INVITEs from public to private UA are hard to identify as
        # NATed at the moment of request processing); look at replies
        #t_on_reply("1");

        if (isflagset(6) && status =~ "(183)|2[0-9][0-9]") {
                fix_nated_contact();
                force_rtp_proxy();
                # otherwise, is it a transaction behind a NAT and we did not
                # know at time of request processing ? (RFC1918 contacts)
        } else if (nat_uac_test("1")) {
                fix_nated_contact();
        };
        ################

        # send it out now; use stateful forwarding as it works reliably
        # even for UDP2TCP
        if (!t_relay()) {
                sl_reply_error();
        };
}